VZCZCXRO5435
RR RUEHCI
DE RUEHKA #1234/01 2110332
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 300332Z JUL 07
FM AMEMBASSY DHAKA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4638
INFO RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO 8031
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 1758
RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU 9206
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 0058
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 0853
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
RHHMUNA/USCINCPAC HONOLULU HI

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 DHAKA 001234 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/30/2017 
TAGS: PHUM PGOV KGOV KDEM BG
SUBJECT: ANATOMY OF THE EXTORTION CASE AGAINST SHEIKH HASINA 
 
REF: DHAKA 1161 
 
Classified By: Charge d'Affaires a.i. Geeta Pasi; reasons 1.4(d) 
 
¶1. (C) SUMMARY. On July 16, Awami League leader and former 
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was detained by police and 
brought before a Dhaka magistrate, where she was accused of 
abetment in an extortion case.  Authorities provided the 
Embassy with copies of evidence, including the confession of 
Sheikh Hasina,s cousin, Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim, copies of 
checks and other bank documents.  Lawyers familiar with the 
case believe there was sufficient evidence presented in the 
charge sheet to prosecute the case. END SUMMARY. 
 
AN ARREST DONE BY THE BOOK 
========================== 
 
¶2. (SBU) Awami League president and former Prime Minister 
(1996-2001) Sheikh Hasina Wazed was arrested by police at her 
residence in Dhaka in the early morning of July 16.  She was 
brought before a Dhaka city magistrate later that morning. 
The court confirmed that the charges against Hasina were in 
order and that her detention was in accordance with the law. 
It was also announced that the Anti-Corruption Commission 
(ACC) will prosecute the case on behalf of the government. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Hasina's son Sajeeb Wazed "Joy" has alleged 
authorities acted illegally in arresting Hasina without a 
warrant. According to the Bangladesh Code of Criminal 
Procedure, however, a person can be arrested without warrant 
for a "cognizable" (serious) offense, which would include the 
charge against Hasina of abetting extortion.  When such cases 
occur, the arresting officer must present the arrestee before 
a magistrate having jurisdiction of the case within 24 hours. 
The judge must then recognize the case as cognizable and 
verify the arrest order, which is what happened in this case. 
 Authorities presented Hasina immediately before a 
magistrate, thus complying with the Code's provisions. 
 
SPECIAL EMERGENCY POWERS RULES 
============================== 
 
¶5. (SBU) The government brought the case against Hasina under 
the Special Emergency Powers Rules of 2007.  These rules, 
enacted by the government after the declaration of a state of 
emergency, suspend the right to bail in cases involving 
serious criminal charges.  The court must dispose of cases 
filed under this rule within 45 days of the framing of 
charges, with a 15-day extension possible if required. 
 
¶6. (SBU) On July 29, Hasina's attorneys filed a writ petition 
with the High Court challenging the government's decision to 
charge her under the Special Emergency Powers Rules.  Counsel 
claim the decision was arbitrary and unconstitutional.  The 
High Court has agreed to accept the writ petition and rule on 
it. (NOTE: The petition does not challenge the actual 
extortion case, only the handling of it under the special 
rules, since this denies her the right to bail.) 
 
ANATOMY OF AN EXTORTION CASE 
============================ 
 
¶7. (SBU) On June 13, Azam Chowdhury, managing director of 
Eastcoast Trading Private Ltd., filed a first incident report 
(FIR) against Hasina and her cousin, Awami League Presidium 
member and former Health Minister Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim. 
He accused them of extorting 29 million taka (approximately 
$430,000) from him in 2000 and 2001 (Reftel). 
 
¶8. (SBU) Selim was arrested on May 28.  On June 21, he made a 
confessional statement in open court.  According to Selim's 
statement, a copy of which was provided to the Embassy, Selim 
admitted to receiving the 29 million taka from Eastcoast on 
behalf of its client, the Russian company Techno Prom Export 
(TPE), which was building a $27 million power plant in 
Narayanganj.  Selim told Hasina, who was then Prime Minister 
and Minister for Power, Energy and Natural Resources, that he 
was acting as a "consultant" on the project, and informed her 
of the "commission." She agreed to have the block on the 
power project removed.  According to Selim, Hasina asked him 
to give to her sister Sheikh Rehana the ten million taka 
($145,000) he had set aside for her. 
 
¶9. (SBU) The prosecution formally filed its charge sheet 
against Hasina, Selim, and Rehana on July 24.  Rehana, 
 
DHAKA 00001234  002 OF 003 
 
 
currently resident in London, is not in police custody. The 
prosecution included names of 24 witnesses and an extensive 
list evidence including records of the power project, bank 
checks made out to cash, bank deposit slips into Selim,s 
accounts corresponding exactly to the amounts of the cash 
checks, and official visitors logs from the official Prime 
Minister,s Residence showing Selim,s and Rehana,s visits 
to Hasina during the period the transactions took place. 
(NOTE: When she was arrested, Hasina denied Rehana was in 
Bangladesh during this timeframe.) 
 
¶10. (SBU) When the charge sheet was filed, the judge set the 
date of August 15 for a hearing to accept the charge sheet 
and schedule a hearing to "frame the charges" -- which will 
start the criminal trial.  This was subsequently rescheduled 
for August 16 so as not to coincide with the August 15 
anniversary of the assassination of Hasina,s father, former 
President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and the killing of most of 
her family in the 1975 coup. 
 
¶11. (C) On July 25, police detained Hafez Ahmed "Khoka," a 
businessman with close ties to Hasina and Selim.  Khoka was 
the man who signed the checks on Selim's behalf.  Khoka was 
presented before a magistrate on July 29 and submitted a 
confessional statement in which he admitted his role in the 
deal and corroborated Selim's confessional statement. An ACC 
prosecutor told us they are confident he will make a strong 
prosecution witness. 
 
PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE PERSPECTIVES ON THE CASE 
============================================= === 
 
¶12. (C) Prosecutors have told us they believe they can get a 
conviction against Hasina under Section 385 of the Bangladesh 
Penal Code, abetting extortion.  The term of imprisonment is 
five to 14 years.  According to the Code, this charge must 
involve either intent or dishonest inducement.  According to 
the prosecution, Selim,s inducement created fear in 
Chowdhury that he would lose his business if he did not pay. 
Hasina was not involved in inducing the fear, but is accused 
of having known, approved of, and supported it. 
 
¶13. (C) The prosecution will argue Hasina knew about the 
inducement and sanctioned it (since Selim told her and she 
permitted him to stay on as a Minister).  Furthermore, at the 
time Hasina held the Power Ministry portfolio, and as such 
had the power to restart the power project in question. 
 
¶14. (SBU) The prosecution says it can prove through bank and 
government records that the reactivation of the power project 
by Hasina coincided with the checks deposited into Selim,s 
accounts.  Lastly, the prosecution will argue Hasina,s 
permitting Selim to remain Health Minister after admitting to 
her he was acting as "consultant" and getting fees from this 
project constituted tolerance and abetting of graft. 
 
¶15. (C) Shortly after the initial FIR was filed on June 13, 
Hasina told the press that the money in question in this case 
was a contribution to the party, "something done all over the 
world." Her defense is expected to argue, however, that 
Hasina knew nothing about the matter since Selim handled it. 
(NOTE: This is Joy's main argument against the arrest.) The 
defense is also expected to claim Selim's confessional 
statement was obtained under duress. 
 
MEANWHILE, ANOTHER CASE PERCOLATES 
================================== 
 
¶16. (SBU) In another development on July 29, a Dhaka 
metropolitan magistrate ordered Hasina to be brought to court 
to be arrested on another case under investigation.  This 
case was brought by former Hasina loyalist and Dhaka 
businessman Noor Ali (reftel).  Ali filed a FIR against 
Hasina claiming he was forced to pay Hasina and another of 
her cousins, Sheikh Helal, over 50 million taka ($725,000) 
and hand over ownership of two apartments to Helal's wife in 
1998 to resolve a dispute between the government and his 
company, which was building a 110-megawatt barge-mounted 
power plant at the time. 
 
COMMENT: COURT OF LAW V. COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION... 
============================================= ====== 
 
¶17. (C) If the charges are to be believed, this case clearly 
lays out how corruption takes place within the Bangladeshi 
 
DHAKA 00001234  003 OF 003 
 
 
government.  That this involved a power project should make 
this case all the more incendiary, given the country's 
current power generation deficit.  Contrary to Joy's 
allegations, the prosecution appears to have enough evidence 
to pursue charges against Hasina, and they are confident they 
can prove their case in court beyond the required reasonable 
doubt.  The problem is whether the government can 
successfully argue the case in the court of public opinion, 
convincing the people this case has merit and is not just a 
political reckoning for Hasina. 
PASI